An official website of the United States government
Addressing “wicked” problems like urban stormwater management necessitates building shared understanding among diverse stakeholders with the influence to enact solutions cooperatively. Fuzzy cognitive maps (FCMs) are participatory modeling tools that enable diverse stakeholders to articulate the components of a socio-environmental system (SES) and describe their interactions. However, the spatial scale of an FCM is rarely explicitly considered, despite the influence of spatial scale on SES. We developed a technique to couple FCMs with spatially explicit survey data to connect stakeholder conceptualization of urban stormwater management at a regional scale with specific stormwater problems they identified. We used geospatial data and flooding simulation models to quantitatively evaluate stakeholders’ descriptions of location-specific problems. We found that stakeholders used a wide variety of language to describe variables in their FCMs and that government and academic stakeholders used significantly different suites of variables. We also found that regional FCM did not downscale well to concerns at finer spatial scales; variables and causal relationships important at location-specific scales were often different or missing from the regional FCM. This study demonstrates the spatial framing of stormwater problems influences the perceived range of possible problems, barriers, and solutions through spatial cognitive filtering of the system’s boundaries.
more »
« less
Making It Spatial Makes It Personal: Engaging Stakeholders with Geospatial Participatory Modeling
Participatory research methods are increasingly used to collectively understand complex social-environmental problems and to design solutions through diverse and inclusive stakeholder engagement. But participatory research rarely engages stakeholders to co-develop and co-interpret models that conceptualize and quantify system dynamics for comparing scenarios of alternate action. Even fewer participatory projects have engaged people using geospatial simulations of dynamic landscape processes and spatially explicit planning scenarios. We contend that geospatial participatory modeling (GPM) can confer multiple benefits over non-spatial approaches for participatory research processes, by (a) personalizing connections to problems and their solutions through visualizations of place, (b) resolving abstract notions of landscape connectivity, and (c) clarifying the spatial scales of drivers, data, and decision-making authority. We illustrate through a case study how GPM is bringing stakeholders together to balance population growth and conservation in a coastal region facing dramatic landscape change due to urbanization and sea level rise. We find that an adaptive, iterative process of model development, sharing, and revision drive innovation of methods and ultimately improve the realism of land change models. This co-production of knowledge enables all participants to fully understand problems, evaluate the acceptability of trade-offs, and build buy-in for management actions in the places where they live and work.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1737563
- PAR ID:
- 10126154
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Land
- Volume:
- 8
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 2073-445X
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 38
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Scientists are increasingly engaging with stakeholders to codesign scenarios of land use change necessitating methods to translate the resulting qualitative scenarios into quantitative simulations. We demonstrate a transparent method for translating participatory scenarios to simulations of land use and land cover (LULC) change using the New England Landscape Futures (NELF) project as a case study. The NELF project codesigned four divergent narrative scenarios that contrast with a Recent Trends scenario projecting a continuation of observed changes New England over the past 20 years. Here, we (1) describe the process and utility of translating qualitative scenarios into spatial simulations using a dynamic cellular land change model, (2) evaluate scenario LULC configuration relative to the Recent Trends scenario and to each other, (3) compare the fate of forests within stakeholder‐defined areas of concern, and (4) describe how a user‐inspired outreach tool was developed to make the simulations and analyses accessible to a diverse user group. The associated simulations are strongly divergent in terms of the amount of LULC change and the spatial pattern of change. Among the scenarios, there is a fivefold difference in the amount of high‐density development and a twofold difference in the amount of protected land. Features of the simulations can clearly be linked back to the original storylines. Overall, the rate of LULC change has a greater influence on stakeholder areas of concern than the spatial configuration. The simulated scenarios have been integrated into an online mapping tool via a user‐engagement process meeting the needs of a variety of stakeholders.more » « less
-
While stakeholder-driven approaches have been increasingly used in scenario modeling, previous studies have mostly focused on the qualitative elements, e.g., narratives and policy documents, from the stakeholders, but lack engagement of stakeholders with quantitative inputs. In this study, we conducted workshops with a stakeholder group to integrate the participatory mapping of future policies in the simulation, and to compare the environmental impacts after including the participatory mapping. A land system change model named CLUMondo was used to simulate four scenarios, i.e., Business-As-Usual (BAU), Destroying Resources in Owyhee (DRO), Ecological Conservation (EC), and Managed Recreation (MR), in Owyhee County, Idaho, United States. The InVEST models were used to assess water yield, soil erosion, and wildlife habitat under the four scenarios. The results show that the DRO scenario would decrease shrubland and increased grassland, thus leading to less water yield, more soil erosion, and deteriorated wildlife habitat anticipated through to 2050. On the contrary, the EC and MR scenarios reverse the trend and would improve these ecosystem services over the same time horizon. The stakeholder-driven policies appear to influence the spatial distribution of the land system and ecosystem services. The results help to reach a nuanced understanding of the stakeholder-driven scenarios and highlight the importance of engaging stakeholders in scenario modeling and environmental impact analysis.more » « less
-
Abstract The present study examined how design thinking processes help to facilitate difficult conversations for fostering organizational change toward greater inclusion and equity in undergraduate engineering programs. Regardless of the type of organization or institution, sustainable diversity and inclusion integration requires difficult conversations that can correspond with locale‐specific interventions and deep cultural transformation. We led a series of design sessions with stakeholders from two undergraduate engineering programs at a large, Midwestern, research university aimed at creating prototype solutions to diversity and inclusion problems. Following the sessions, we conducted interviews with 19 stakeholders to understand their perceptions of the design process in facilitating both difficult conversations and in enacting meaningful change. Our study uncovered that organizational cultures impacted participants’ perceptions of change possibilities and their role in change. We conclude with recommendations for adopting design practices and communication‐as‐design processes to create structures and interactive approaches for facilitating conversations toward inclusionary organizational change.more » « less
-
Understanding and modeling the trajectories of change in broad level interactions in food-energy-water systems is incomplete when it is undertaken by researchers in isolation from those who live and work in the systems. For models and outcomes to have validity they need to be subjected to sustained development and iteration with stakeholders. This requires a paradigm shift in our thinking of stakeholder engagement from viewing such engagement as an isolated activity or part of the data collection methods to thinking of engagement as a process of knowledge generation. That process hinges on building relationships and building trust, and also sustaining these as long-term relationships through multiple elements of research design and execution. Using the case-study of a mid-size river basin we demonstrate a co-production of knowledge process for food-energy-water systems. The findings highlight the multiple and different ways in which knowledge co-production can be transacted in food-energy-water systems while also generating solutions to the use and re-use of water, energy, and nutrients at the landscape level.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.3390/land8020038
